Bruce, Your point of view has an extremely small and unexperienced scope, and I'm sure you feel intelligent within that scope, but you must understand that if scientists rehearsed in the Theory of Evolution (way beyond your scope) listened to your argument, they would be falling all over themselves laughing.
I'm not trying to humiliate you; I'm trying to prevent you from being humiliated by making statements like these. Watch the Nova episode we've been talking about all the way through -- especially the parts where they show intermediate species connecting branches of the evolutionary tree -- before you continue on with this thread. You'll be glad you did. Remember that Nova isn't rendering an opinion; they are simply reporting what happened and explaining the scientific rigor (and lack thereof) that went into presenting each side of the argument. Respectfully, Adam Phillip Churvis President Productivity Enhancement -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Sorge [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2007 3:40 PM To: CF-Community Subject: RE: Great press for Our Lord and Savior OK, I am back. OK, so Darwin claims that organisms just evolve into better organisms, that the less desirable traits of an organism die off and the more desirable traits survive and evolve into other organisms, leading to the creation of actual species, and that these species evolve into higher species and so on. So if this is true, where is the intermediate form of species, the connecting links if you will? Darwin was asked this question and he did not have an answer. Nor is there any archeological evidence to back his theory. Although there is ample evidence for many complete species, fossil records provide almost no evidence for the intermediate connecting links. Later on, Darwin's theory was revised by scientists and thus was born the Punctuated Equilibrium evolutionary theory, supposedly making evolution invisible in the fossil record (how convenient). But of course this theory is not verifiable in any way and is in fact considered highly speculative. Many will say that the fossil record furnishes proof of evolution, but the question again has to be asked: Where are the half-evolved dinosaurs or other creatures? The answer is, there are none? The only thing that the fossil record contains is the records of complete, fully-formed species. If evolution were true, then surely there would be proof of half or partially evolved species? This is one of the many holes in his theory, and to me this is a big one. Something cannot evolve out of nothing, right? If evolution were true, then again I ask where the proof is. Where are the partially evolved species? If something is partially evolved, then how a partially evolved species could eat, breath or breed is beyond me. Can someone offer a scientific explanation of this? Let's just start with the above questions and see where it goes from there. Bruce -----Original Message----- From: Dana Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2007 10:08 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Great press for Our Lord and Savior Bruce What do you see as holes? just wondering Dana ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Check out the new features and enhancements in the latest product release - download the "What's New PDF" now http://download.macromedia.com/pub/labs/coldfusion/cf8_beta_whatsnew_052907.pdf Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:246614 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
